Tech right back where it started

The two-week siege of the Big 12 Conference came to a quiet conclusion Tuesday afternoon when Texas Tech officially renewed its 14-year-old vows to the league.

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe swooped in at the last minute and delivered the dollar signs, administrators said, preventing what only a few days earlier appeared to be an imminent collapse of the conference.

Beebe has now wooed back Tech and four other restless member schools with promises of a lucrative new television contract, one that could double Tech's broadcast earnings by 2016.

"I think the main thing in going forward that we have to look at is that no matter what option you have, we're going to have additional money," Tech Chancellor Kent Hance said. "No matter whether someone likes or dislikes the end result right now, the end result is going to be additional money for Texas Tech and Texas Tech's sports programs."

The Big 12 has yet to work out the details, but TV networks have guaranteed that the league will not lose revenue because of last week's defections by the universities of Colorado and Nebraska.

Tech's share of the revenue will not change relative to other nine remaining schools - with Texas A&M, the University of Texas and the University of Oklahoma receiving a larger percentage - but the overall pot will be split between fewer institutions.

And that ultimately means more money in Tech's pocket.

It's a fair model, university officials agreed, even if the university doesn't receive the same cut as A&M or UT.

"They've won a national title," Tech athletic director Gerald Myers said about the Longhorns. "They've won two or three conference titles. They've earned that position, and they will make $15 million this year and we will make $10.9 million. We'll have the opportunity to make $20 million if our team's good enough. All of us have come out with twice as much money, revenue-wise, than we did a week ago."

Hance hailed the resolution as a success, adding the "worst thing that could've happened is that nothing would've happened" in terms of the university's television earnings.

Not only will the now-slimmer Big 12 offer more money to each of its schools, Tech President Guy Bailey said, but it has retained most of its key rivalries - particularly the in-state matchups Tech treasures most.

Bailey said that is why Tech repeatedly upheld its vows of solidarity to A&M and UT, not because it is a vassal of Texas' two larger public schools.

"Anytime we're able to continue in a conference where we play Texas, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State is in our best interest," he said. "We think it's certainly in our best interest to play our rivals."

What has yet to be resolved is how the Big 12 will distribute the millions in penalty fees it stands to collect from the two defectors.

Beebe said Tuesday they owe the league approximately 80 percent of the television revenues for the remainder of their time in the conference.

He said the Big 12's five would-be-orphan schools in the North Division agreed to surrender that money and give it to Oklahoma, UT and A&M - an incentive to lure them back to the league.

But Hance said he was not involved in those negotiations and wants that money to be divvied up among the entire league.

"We don't necessarily always agree with everything that goes on, but we're part of the family, and we'll discuss any disagreements at the next meeting," he said. "That's the way it happens. I will assure you that when I meet with the family, I always tell them how I feel."

The Big 12's survival may seem like a tame outcome compared to the bewildering scenarios floating around the world of college athletics when years of frustration at some member schools gave way late last week to outright mutiny.

As the league's members nervously awaited official word that Colorado and Nebraska would go elsewhere, tensions mounted.

When their departures became official, a square-dance of shifting loyalties ensued, and soon is was reported that A&M was making overtures to a move to the Southeastern Conference.

Tech, UT, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, meanwhile, engaged in a brief courtship with the Pacific-10 Conference.

Larry Scott, the Pac-10 commissioner, arrived in Lubbock on Sunday and gave what appears to have been a enticing pitch to Tech.

"They were very impressive and they did a good job," Hance said Tuesday. "That was always a possibility."

Bailey later said the Pac-10's offer was extended to all of the Big 12 prospects. Where one went, they would all go.

ESPN has reported that a handful of powerful outside players jumped into the fray to prevent the Big 12's collapse. Other reports said billionaires Warren Buffett, one of the nation's richest men, and T. Boone Pickens, the Texas oil tycoon, threw their weight behind Beebe.

When asked what they knew about these reports, Tech's administrators shrugged.

"Not a clue," Bailey said.

Hance added: "I heard Jimmy Buffet on the radio this morning, but not Warren."

The whole saga and rampant speculation finally simmered Monday when a string of recommitments came from UT, Oklahoma, OSU and A&M.

Beebe's feverish efforts to hold the conference together paid off, but there was still one last holdout in Lubbock.

With a meeting of Tech's Board of Regents scheduled for the next day, Hance said he was waiting for the governing board's input before giving the final word.

Regents spent more than an hour Tuesday in a teleconference behind closed doors before Hance, Bailey and Myers made the official announcement.

It was the outcome Beebe predicted during a talk with reporters a few hours earlier.

"I think any kind of exercise like this results in some bruises that we're going to have to heal," Beebe said after expressing his relief in the Big 12's survival. "I think there's also an even higher level of understanding of how much we need each other."

Because most of the schools in questions could have made more television revenue in other conferences, he chalked up the Big 12's survival to the solidarity of its members.

The money, he said, was not the deciding factor.

"Certainly, resources are very important to provide opportunities to the student-athletes ... but a strong, strong consideration was the association of these schools," Beebe said.

And the new 10-team Big 12 will likely not add any new members anytime soon, he added, though there may be a name change on the horizon.

"We're not looking to expand at all," he said. "We're very comfortable where we are now."

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Every time you hear from a UT or A&M supporter they let you know Tech is second class citizen. All this does is confirm it. Hance got pushed around in politics and is allowing Tech to get pushed around. The people in Dallas, Austin and most of the state have zero respect for what goes on in Lubbock.

Get over it. As far as MAJOR sports conferences are concerned, TTU has no clout. The only real chance Tech had to be in the PAC (pick a number) was to follow Texas and Oklahoma. Be glad we are still in a good situation.

It is only a matter of time before Texas and Oklahoma do something else. Better hope they still want us along.

I love Tech and think we have a competitive program, but saying we are the same as Texas doesn't make it so.

OU and UT getting a bigger cut doesn't bother me much, because they have actually accomplished something in the past 10 seasons. A&M getting the same cut as those schools infuriates me. What have they done? Zilch. I would have loved to see the Aggies get their rear end handed to them week after week in the SEC. A&M is the definition of an under-achieving school. Athletic department deep in debt and unable to do anything with highly rated recruiting classes.

Texas Tech sufferd a blow yesterday to it's repulation and growth momentum. It had options that the Regents and administration failed to explore based on fear and intimidation. Decision making by fear is not leadership. No courage = failure.

The Red Raider's hapless leadership put us in the back of the bus. We are better than that. They accepted it and endorsed the poor treatment of the University and its community = all this without a fight. It's like Tech is the 3rd younger child in a family of 3 that constantly exceeds expectations (academic and athletic growth), yet it is continually struggling to get out from under its shadow of it's bullying siblings. Tech always makes due and excells with less, and for that all Red Raiders should be proud, but the status quo is not acceptable.

WE CAN DO THIS, it's just going to take time - a change in the inferiority complex culture in Lubbock, more consistent wins and growth. Tech should and can stand alone. Go West, East -- wherever Texas is not. The sooner the better...

The real problem with Tech's situation is that governor Perry bleeds maroon.

Perry appointed the "leaders" who are ruining Tech. The board of regents and chancellor Kent Hance to name a few.

Hance has squandered money everywhere. He has opened satellite campuses and closed them a few years later after spending enormous amounts of money on them. He has letr our honors department head resign. he has sold off Tech assets for privated development. And, he was behind the debacle that cost Tech a good and productive head football coach and will cost Tech money after the lawsuit is over.

During the push to join the Pac 10, all the schools were releasing statements about where they stood except for Tech. Bailey (the joke that he is) made no comment And Hance would not answer his phone.

The only way Tech is going to become a real school is to change the people that a are ruining Tech. This includes governor perry. Thais is not a political statement this is a fact. If you a have a disease, you haVe to remove the cause off the disease. Rthiss ahas
Nothing to do with liberal, conservative, republican, or democrat.

I take it TT, feaco and the others who are always anti-Tech and anti-Administration and always proTeamLooney, are paid by the number of posts, not the quality, or lack thereof, of posts.

Your anti-Lubbock agenda is evident. Pls tells us what you would have done if we didn't have a stand alone invite to the PAC. Once the pac 10 wasn't an option, what other league would you have chosen instead that would pay as much?

Tech is not right back where it started because the next time the Pac10 comes looking to expand, it will only have 4 spots available. I am pretty sure UT will take aTm and OU will take OSU. Tech will be left behind.

We accept less because "They've won a national title," Tech athletic director Gerald Myers said about the Longhorns. "They've won two or three conference titles. They've earned that position, and they will make $15 million this year and we will make $10.9 million. We'll have the opportunity to make $20 million if our team's good enough. All of us have come out with twice as much money, revenue-wise, than we did a week ago." I can't believe he really said that. Unbelievable.

How many national titles have the Aggies won. They get more because.......why?

No other conference has a tiered payout because "They've earned it". The SEC, Big Ten, Pac 10 don't. But....as long as we have administrators who believe we are second class this is what we will get. After their actions of the last year why should we expect anything more from them. Incompetent and self serving.

Hance says he doesn't want the money the other 5 schools were offering......Apparently OU, UT & TAMU sure don't mind taking an addtional piece of the pie. There is an old West Texas saying that goes something like this, "If you can't run with the big dogs stay on the porch". Our administrators have curled up in the fetal position and stayed on the porch.

Redr8dr4life. It is obvious you work for Hance. If you cared about Tech, you. Would like for it to be a great school instead of tier 3 school that it has become.

Was Tech offered a position in the Pac 10 by itself. Maybe they were. We will probablynever know. This has nothing to do with Leach. He was mentioned only because it shows the actions of an inept chancellor. I am glad that you are happy with the status quo. Because that is what is going to be when people like you do not take your blinders off.

It's my first comment ever on the LAJ website and I'm always anti-Tech? Someone is paranoid. Challenging the Hance & Myers comments/decisions does not make one anti-Tech. Just want what is best for our University.

Feaco, your absolute hatred and loathing of Texas Tech, by saying Tech isn't a "real school", just because you don't like 2 or 3 people, pretty much insults, denigrates and belittles tens of thousands of students, faculty, staff and alumni. I'm sure they would tell you what you could do with your opinion that tech is "second rate" (from another posting of yours on the AJ) and that Tech is not a "real school". To insult and demean an entire group of people, because of your hatred of two people, shows very little class on your part. I would take a politician's behavior over yours any day.

Great quote from Genious Gerald Myers in explaining why UT is getting more money in this new deal, "They've won a national title.", referring to UT. "They've won two or three conference titles."

So Genious Gerald, who's fault is it that Tech hasn't won anything? Wouldn't that fall in the AD's lap?

If so, then your incompetence is going to cost Tech between $3 million and $5 million a year, right?

The closest you've come was a tie for the B12 South in football and for that you fire your coach.

C'mon GG. Sure, UT is going to make more money than Tech but not because they've won more titles. If the split was going to be based on titles only then Tech would be due about $100,000 a year out of the deal.

Please revisit your position on this. It makes you look dumber than you already look. Or better yet, just stop talking altogether.

This is a blog not a term paper. I assume you work for perry since you defend his actions and appointments by calling anybody who does not agree anti-Tech. I certainly am not anti-Tech. Wanting to stop the stealing, gross mismanagement of funds and general poor management at Tech does not make me anti-Tech. In fact, if you would read my posts, you would find that I am pro-Tech. I want Tech to do better.

Nobody knows whether Tech was offered a spot in the Pac 10 except the administration. Perhaps Tech could have joined the Pac 10 but we will never know because of the stonewalling and lack of information from Hance and Bailey.

There was really nothing Hance and Myers could do. They had no leverage. Iowa State, Baylor, Kansas, K-St and Missouri were just grateful to still be in the conference. They weren't about to make waves about revenue distribution. A&M was paid off to keep from defecting to the SEC. Tech and Okla. State were basically on their own. What were they going to do? Threaten to leave? (The whole cutting off your nose to spite your face thing) The Pac10 door was already shut. The WAC and MWC were possible options, I guess. That doesn't mean that this doesn't suck, but life isn't fair. Tech just needs to continue growing academically and athletically to make themselves a larger commodity the next time realignment fever occurs.

Bert Echo. You are probably correct, however I am curious as to what offers did Tech get. The other schools told us what their offers were (A package deal). But our administrators said nothing. Could Tech have joined the PAC 10? I do not know if we had the chance or if we were not asked. This is what is wrong with Tech Everybody else knew what their schools were offering but Hance and Bailey were out pocket. I am not saying Tech should go to the Pac 10 by itself, but I am asking were they given a chance to go by themselves. There are many good rivalries in the Big 12 that carry over from the Southwest Conference and they would have probably died if Tech went to the Pac 10 by itself.

By Raider76 | 06/16/10 - 10:59
How many national titles have the Aggies won. They get more because.......why?

Texas A&M only claims the 1939 national football title; the College Football Data Warehouse Recognized National Champions List includes the 1919 national football title as well. A&M was 8-0-1 in 1927 when Yale supposedly won the title with a record of 7-0-1. So, how many national championships has A&M won? That’s a question that can be debated. How many national titles Texas Tech has won isn’t debatable…

Tech needs to stay in the Big 12, but separate itself from TU. Out in El Paso, UTEP cannot compete w/ TU or Tech, but they have better story lines happening out there and they don't rely on TU or anybody in Conference USA. There are enough supporters in the Lubbock Area to support Tech and the stadium is growing gradually. If Tech doesn't separate itself and stand on it's own 2 feet, UTEP, UH, or TCU will move in on them because the are standing on their own feet. There are about 1 million people in El Paso and it's growing fast. UH is in Houston which is a large city and TCU is very popular in the metroplex. I hope not to see the day that Tech is replaced and moved to Conference USA and UTEP, UH and TCU are in the Big 12. Tech will be left out in the cold if they don't go forward.

I cannot handle the fact that we took 6 million less than the others to stay in the conferance. Maybe james craig at ESPN a bonus. Maybe they like us to look like losers since we ran-off Leach and back to where we started. a losing, boring, second rate school.

It's all about the money, I am sad to say. It's no longer about true sport. It seems all any college football program is doing is gearing up the students for the NFL draft to see how much money they can earn later in life. If that's not true, then why do we pay coaches so much? Why do we have a "temple of play" on the campus and not something like Lowery Field? I heard a coach once ask his team if they knew what NFL meant. They shook their heads and he replied "Not for Long".